Florian von Knobelsdorff-Brenkenhoff1, Angelika Bublak, Sana El-Mahmoud, Ralf Wassmuth, Christian Opitz, Jeanette Schulz-Menger. 1. Department of Cardiology and Nephrology, Working Group on Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance, Experimental and Clinical Research Center, a joint cooperation between the Charité Medical Faculty Berlin and the Max-Delbrueck Center for Molecular Medicine, and HELIOS Klinikum Berlin-Buch, Berlin 13125, Germany. florian.von-knobelsdorff@charite.de
Abstract
AIMS: Awareness of cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) is growing due to increasing evidence for providing relevant functional and morphologic information. This single-centre survey aimed at providing descriptive data about the clinical application and potential impact of CMR. METHODS AND RESULTS: All 2598 clinically indicated CMR exams were prospectively registered during 1 year in one single centre. Detailed data of the individual patient and procedural information of each exam were collected. In a simulation of CMR-based clinical decision-making in a subgroup of 250 cases, the influence of CMR on further diagnostic testing and answering the clinical question was estimated. Inflammatory (31%) and coronary (28%) heart disease were the most frequent indications. The exams were fast (98% < 60 min), robust (0.4% non-diagnostic image quality), and mostly used contrast media (76%). Anxiolytic sedation was required to overcome claustrophobia in 3.8%. Two per cent of all exams were terminated prematurely. No severe adverse events occurred. All moderate adverse events (0.5%) were associated with stress medication (1.7% of all stress tests) or contrast media (0.15% of all contrast enhanced studies). In the simulation, CMR influenced the individual selection of diagnostic testing and provided valuable information to establish or exclude a diagnosis. CONCLUSION: This single-centre experience demonstrated a versatile application of CMR at reasonable time expense, safety, and robustness. The simulation of CMR-based decision-making indicated that CMR may influence patient management.
AIMS: Awareness of cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) is growing due to increasing evidence for providing relevant functional and morphologic information. This single-centre survey aimed at providing descriptive data about the clinical application and potential impact of CMR. METHODS AND RESULTS: All 2598 clinically indicated CMR exams were prospectively registered during 1 year in one single centre. Detailed data of the individual patient and procedural information of each exam were collected. In a simulation of CMR-based clinical decision-making in a subgroup of 250 cases, the influence of CMR on further diagnostic testing and answering the clinical question was estimated. Inflammatory (31%) and coronary (28%) heart disease were the most frequent indications. The exams were fast (98% < 60 min), robust (0.4% non-diagnostic image quality), and mostly used contrast media (76%). Anxiolytic sedation was required to overcome claustrophobia in 3.8%. Two per cent of all exams were terminated prematurely. No severe adverse events occurred. All moderate adverse events (0.5%) were associated with stress medication (1.7% of all stress tests) or contrast media (0.15% of all contrast enhanced studies). In the simulation, CMR influenced the individual selection of diagnostic testing and provided valuable information to establish or exclude a diagnosis. CONCLUSION: This single-centre experience demonstrated a versatile application of CMR at reasonable time expense, safety, and robustness. The simulation of CMR-based decision-making indicated that CMR may influence patient management.
Authors: Felix Nensa; E Tezgah; K Schweins; J Goebel; P Heusch; K Nassenstein; T Schlosser; T D Poeppel Journal: J Nucl Cardiol Date: 2016-03-18 Impact factor: 5.952
Authors: Puja Shahrouki; Kim-Lien Nguyen; John M Moriarty; Adam N Plotnik; Takegawa Yoshida; J Paul Finn Journal: Br J Radiol Date: 2021-09-01 Impact factor: 3.629
Authors: Andre Rudolph; Daniel Messroghli; Florian von Knobelsdorff-Brenkenhoff; Julius Traber; Johannes Schüler; Ralf Wassmuth; Jeanette Schulz-Menger Journal: BMC Med Imaging Date: 2015-11-17 Impact factor: 1.930
Authors: Angela Rosenbohm; Benjamin Schmid; Dominik Buckert; Wolfgang Rottbauer; Jan Kassubek; Albert C Ludolph; Peter Bernhardt Journal: Front Neurol Date: 2017-09-27 Impact factor: 4.003